It seems that the only ones who are *not* up to the task of research are those who have been brainwashed by dogma into believing whatever their
preacher/pastor/rabbi/etc tells them...In other words, they've been as thouroughly indoctrinated into their religion as any extremist with loyalty to
a political party. They're too sure of themselves to even ask a few questions & find a few answers.

Remember, the concept of religion sprang out of hysterical superstition -- ancient man reacting to an environment he did not understand. Mystical
intervention was, and is, an easy concept to put in place of unanswered questions.

As such, religion is not a means to control society. It is quite the opposite, it is the means for society to accept control. Organized
religion (not individual spirituality) is the phenomenon of a society that wants to be controlled.

Originally posted by MidnightDStroyer
It seems that the only ones who are *not* up to the task of research are those who have been brainwashed by dogma into believing whatever their
preacher/pastor/rabbi/etc tells them...In other words, they've been as thouroughly indoctrinated into their religion as any extremist with loyalty to
a political party. They're too sure of themselves to even ask a few questions & find a few answers.

This phenomenon is appearing everywhere.
Religion, of course. But also political party, military institutions, private company ( our products are the best of the best.... ).

It's inherent to the humanbeings. It's not inherent only to the religious peoples.

Truth you Idiot, can't even spell Shroud of Turin right. Not Turon, and, it proved to be from 14-16 hundreds, not the time of your "savoir" Man,
love you being back.

Religon controls the masses, look at Catholics. They can't even look at the line let alone cross it if the Bible says it is ok. Heck, one can't
even think if a Catholic, well, couldn't if they followed Catholic religon to the letter. They say you do this, go to hell, you do this, go to hell,
but of course, raping little boys isn't a hell worthy, but not going to church on a sunday is. I know, Catholics messed up and all, I agree, but
they aren't only ones who use religon to control masses.

Islam is used to control women the way men want them to be by the Arabs. They use religon to make execution of a women legal for showing their
face. That not controlling masses?

And, this planet being here is luck, not miracle. Life is luck, just ask the dinosaurs, their luck ran out. No such thing as miracles, but luck
and chances. But, today, sometimes skill can take effect over luck and chance. Sorry, truth, you can't even spell one of your most important
arguements right. Turin, not Turon.

Then, your god made one religon to let us be free. But if we don't follow it we go to hell. Not freedom if you ask me. Then, if you don't do
this the way he says, you go to hell. Unless your god is all forgiving, then no one in hell, for all forgiven. Hitler, Pol Pot, KKK members, Lee
Harvey Oswald, politicians, lawyers, all forgiven. So, all in heaven.

Well, YEAH! Punching bag is back! Oops, truth is back! So, what miracle that never happened proves god? Or what false truths prove evolution not
real, if it even has to do with evolution. Last time you posted stuff that proved fossilization. Don't know why, but you did.

I'm not specialy religious, but I would like to know what's your problem with religions ( all of them, not just 1 ).

Why are you so anti-religion ?

And you know, you can't banned religions. There will be allways peoples who needs them. I don't say they are right. I just say that some peoples
needs them. What do you want to do ? Killing billions and billions of peoples, just because they believes in God or another so-called suprem being ?

It's interesting to observe the reactions of devout theists such as the person logged in as "Truth".

From the standpoint of any particular religion, it's relatively easy to describe any given event as a potential miracle. During pre-history as the
concept of religion evolved, this basic idea was adopted to describe the confusion of a complex environment. "One cannot possibly understand how the
rain comes when it comes, so our deity must have given us rain as a blessing and miracle."

Without examining the validity of any particular religion, we can gauge the effect on society of devout beliefs. As mentioned in this thread,
societies (not people) have accepted religion as a method of control. Societies as organisms must have a directive, else they become aimless entities
doomed to disaster. For the majority of human history, society has adopted religion as the yoke of control.

However, as does everything, society evolves. We are witnessing the emergence of the first society that has become self-aware. As if the collective
humanity has suddenly caught a glimpse of itself passing by a mirror. Thus, humanity is entering a transitional period whereby the desire for societal
control will be reexamined.

Change. All organisms must change, evolve, adapt, improve, and overcome; or they will die. The collective humanity is such an organism.

In the end, after humanity has a few more glimpses at itself in the mirror, religion will likely be another vestige of ancient thinking that begins to
fade away. Much like an unused organ that is no longer required.

UP, I wouldn't consider your post an attack even if you didn't say so. It is just a question.

Why am I against religon? it creates false hope for one thing. You believe your savoir will come and rescue you in times of need. At the end,
when the apocolyps(sp?) comes one thinks his savoir will come and save him. But, if that doesn't happen, your screwed blued and tatooed, Screwed
without being kissed, up Shiznick creek without a paddle, however you want to say it. In end, you lose and your hope did nothing.

Second, I am against sensless killings. Most sensless killings are the witch trials, Iqusition, the Crusades, and the slaughter of the
"barbarians" in the name of the Christian god. Then the people lost on 9/11 and in isreal for the Arab god Allah. Of course you have the Jews
killing people for not being Jews, and Hindu did the same thing. All senseless, all because of a "my god right your's wrong" attitude. Think
about it, religon, mostly Catholic, killed science, then kept it in the grave when it was being ressurected by Copernicus and the like.

This lead to people dying at a young age. Greeks middle age was 25-30, when Catholic in power of Europe, middle age was 15-20. Then, you get
ignorant people killing honest people for the fact they came with some new technology the Catholic church said was satans work. Or, they were killed
for disagreeing with the Catholic Church. Sure, other religons did this to, for fear of what the new idea/technology would bring, but catholic church
burnt entire cities for a couple people in it disagreed with them. Or, in italy, a city was destroyed because of a house that held "pagan" works of
art.

Then, medically. Some strict Islam won't even think about taking medicine for Allah doesn't say it is ok. So they die when the medicine could
save them.

Or, old days of Catholic in power, the Black Plague. It killed 30-35 million people. But, China had it first, and longer. But China lost about
half a million. What is the difference? China had herbal medicine and the like which were witchcraft in Europe, they had cats that ate the rats that
spread the plague unlike Europe for cats evil and killed off, and last, China knew something about spread of disease due to studying and, while not
quite doctors, but somone who knew about taking care of sick saw how it spread. Of course, to suggest the plague was spread through the air was said
to be disagreeing with church, for they thought god was punishing the sinners. So, because of one religon, millions died. Millions died because one
religon was in power and said the way to stop the plague was evil for their god was doing it.

Then, the Jews. Hitler killed them because of his religous beliefs and of their religous beliefs. Maybe if Hitler was a Jew, he wouldn't have
gone after the Jews. But if he was nothing and the Jews nothing, then no reason to kill them.

Religon causes death and destruction, all meaningless. Sure, other things cause wars to, but Arabs didn't attack the U.S.A. because they were
white, but because they weren't Islamic and deserved to die in the name of Allah. If you see differently(TC,UP, truth) say so. I'd like to read
your views.

RDO Religion is a conclusion unrelated to the scientific method, only because in the days it was offered as an explanation. Society was not as well
organized as it has been in the resent past. The question then now being does modern science draw similar conclusions?

It is easy to portend that ancient society was filled with idiots (one simply needs to look at the political arena of the time or for that matter that
of today). But to deny ancient society and equivalent to Einstein, Rosen or Poldousky is quite another story (for that matter Newton).

Truth (poster) is still looking for the edge of the Earth, as such would advise he be ignored (sorry "Truth" but "Shroud of Turon" you have got to
be kidding).

SetiPsychic what do you know of Anubis and the legends of his experiments with cats (Without cats there are plenty of rats). Might I suggest that the
Roseta stone was discovered long before it was actually admitted to existing. Seti (abbreviation) todate my responses in regard to your posts have
been clearly as if you are kindred. Might I suggest the problem is not with the Moslems but rather with the Persians. A culture which despite popular
belief has not been forgotten (wolves amongst the sheep).

Perhaps my explanation wasn't clear enough. As always, my focus is on society as a whole, and not the individual. Certainly, in the era of
pre-history, there were stand-out geniuses of their day who noticed the connection between increased cloud cover, wind, falling temperatures, and
rain. However, these individuals had little accumulative effect on the small society of which they were part.

My efforts have been to explain aspects of societal evolution through the scientific method. Following the evolution of culture, societal change, and
crux points, one can notice patterns. It's these patterns that help a society recognize when they are approaching trouble, or perhaps prosperity.

Religion has been an influencing factor on society since there were groups of humanity we could call societies. In the equation of these patterns of
humanity, religion has been a diminishing factor. One can only surmise that societal crux is nearing in which the important of religion will undergo a
fundamental change.

RDO, choosing to believe that ancient society simply was amazed with what our satellites can track is not a direction I take. Experience has taught me
that despite casual explanation, matter (as well as awareness) does transcends all states perceived as apparent today.

What is defined as paranormal is to say the very least a Jungian phenomenon. Religion explores these issues and attempts to place them into
perspective. While beyond this there may in fact be seamonsters, would advise that religion
offers the shadow of what is to come. Perhaps RDO you find Alder, Skinner or the works of Freud to suffice. For me it is Jung (being what to me are
things which are apparent as a result of experience).

What the future offers is an opportunity of awareness, to drop the facade. This that the capacity exist to go beyond what is apparent. What I mean in
regard to the intellectuals of past societies, is that they became aware of specificity not clear and apparent to this day (at least in the sense we
often do not admit).

Ok SetiPsychic, I can understand your point of view, even if I'm not agree about all you wrote. I can understand you, because there is some years
ago, I was like you. Anti-religions, and specialy anti-christians.

But you do a confusion ( like I did it )between the religions and the peoples.The problems that you pointed in your post are not coming from these
religions, but from a false interpretation of these religions.

Religious peoples ( priests, rabbis, imams ) do not understand exactely their own religions. They are afraid by God, and they do stupids things,
because they think they are right. But look those who don't do these mistakes, and are opens, pro-peaces, and respectfull for others beliefs.

If religions are from God, then, they are good. Because the " bad " is allways coming from the Evil. And religion are not Evils. But religions can
be perverted by some evils or stupids peoples. I think it's you problem. You do a confusion with the religious peoples and their religions.

There is good muslims and bad muslims, good christians and bad christians...and so on... You can't blame all of them because some of them have( or
had ) bad behaviours. It's like to say that all whites are racists, coz some of them are from the KKK. Or all the blacks are racists coz some of them
are with Black Panthers.
It's to much simplistic.

And for Hitler & the Jews, the problem is a little bit more complex that you think. First of all, Hitler was NOT christian, or catho, or muslim...And
his mother was jew.

I saw some Truth posts.I don't want to be his lawyer, but he's not looking racist, and I don't think he want to do a new inquisition or Crusade.
He's allways polite and pretty cool with other ATS users. Of course, in 2002, he's looking out of date.But it doesn't mean that he's wrong.

May be you don't know it, but your own behaviour against religious peoples is exactely like what you pointed. If there was an anti-religious
Crusade/inquisition, you'll be the first to lighted the woodsheds. It's sound like " do what I say, but don't do what I do ".

You know, the Christs words were an appeal to the humanity. Do not lie, do not kill, do not fight....and so on... Only good things. It's only what
some humans did with His words that is evil. Not his words.

UP, you say that the preist/rabbi/imams misinterprett(sp?) their religon and the scriptures that they follow. So it is the people's fault. But, if
they never had these religous scriptures, couldn't be misinterpretted(sp?) and so they wouldn't have done what they did.

Yes, Hitlers mom was a Jew(i heard grandma) but he wasn't. Maybe he had mother issues. But still, you right it ran deeper than you Jew you evil.
He needed a scape goat for Germany's bad economy and such, and jews weren't on everybody's who I love list already, so perfect target.

But you are wrong(to me) with the if religon comes from god can't be bad. Look at what religon does to people. The Catholics nearly destroyed
humanity in Europe. Islam has plenty of extremist around to send and blow people up. Hinduism has it legal to burn a women for burning dinner.
Then, back to Islam. They have it legal to stone a women to death for showing her face, because their god says so.

"One who gives up freedom for temporary safty deserves niether freedom or safty"

You will be seeing that at bottom of my posts soon, anyways.

But religon can also hurt people while trying to help. Give someone false hope. Or, with this "faith" healing. Someone might decide god healed
them, no need for medical help. But, then the disease kills them because "faith" healing is bs, just like Brian is the son of god is bs. Another
thing, look at how some use religon. For their own personal gain.

But, if no religon to begin with, can't exploit people that way. I mean, you hear of people and the Kool-Aid. or, with Brian, "miracle" water.
Then, televangilist. They warp religon to make millions. But, if no religon to begin with, no way they could do that.

Didn't want to mix my response to UP and truth, so here truth. You say you have all this proof, but don't give it, just say I know it.

So, cancer healed twice in family? Hell, my mom had skin cancer that went away for awhile, then about a year later, it came back. But, using
technology you call evil, she lived. it is called going into remission.(sp?)

Nice to see you can spell Turin right. But, bs biotcho. It is fake. Using science, it was proven fake. Now, sure when religous nuts went over it
they "proved" it was a miracle.

Then, fatima seen by preists. Was this before or after they got done raping kids?

Or this curing blind. Idiot, it is a scam. Have you never seen a televangilist? It is called conning the stupid. Have a few people in crowd who
work for you with different disabilities. Go to them, then heal them. Then other people see what you do and give money for you to do it to them.
Pretty easy scam to pull off with people like you out there.

So truth, your god changes the channel to the T.V. with out the remote? Wow, I'm god! It is called going over to the T.V. and changing it. Not
that complicated.

Ok, these camps where people like you will be put are already being built. Where are they? Shouldn't they be making news? Hhhhmmmmmmm.....

Who'd imagine I say this but, Septi-Psycho has a legitimate point. "Religion", to a large extent, messes things up. He attributes too much of
history's warfare to it, but other than that, he has a point.

Let's tweak it just a bit though, shall we, James? Let us say there is a God that created all, including us. Let's say that He has a certain way
that He wants His creation to be, to include us stupid humans, who've already thrown a monkey wrench into the deal. He inspires men to write
"scriptures" in different places and at different times, and then has the scriptures assembled together. I wouldn't call that a religion, but a
guide to a relationship with the Creator.

Now, then. Once you have this book and have a possibility of a personal relationship, in comes man, with ideas of how to make it "holier", or
whatever. He changes it a bit, adds rituals, and makes it more complicated and difficult. Now, you have a religion. Just like all the "false
religions", just built off of the true way, but corrupted.
Point is, one of those ways is the correct way, and not a religion and the rest are religions. Happy hunting.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.